UNDELIVERED BRANDY

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIII, Issue 10063, 30 August 1918, Page 6

UNDELIVERED BRANDY

A SHIPPING DISPUTE. Press Association. CHRISTCHURCH, August 29.’ In tho Magistrate's Court to-day Quill, Morris and Co. proceeded against .the Now Zealand Shipping Company for £47 17s, value or brandy undelivered. For the plaintiffs, it was stated that a hogshead of brandy, forming part of a shipment, was delivered empty. Impressed on a bill of lading covering tho goods there appeared “Ship nob responsible for quantity ot contents.” The shipping company claimed that they were covered by the impressed clause, .but plaintiffs held that defendants had given a receipt for 520 packages of merchandise, and tho clause quoted merely meant that although there might bo some quantity which was not apparent from outside observation, this clause did not really affect tho particular shipment, and was never intended to apply to it. The words were meant to override or qualify section 15 of the Mercantile Law Act, which made tho signature of tho master signing for the lading conclusive against him. Tho plaintiffs contended that the contents of tho cask were pilfered in the for defendants pointed out that in tho bill of lading it was specially stated that goods were delivered “in apparent good order and condition.” Those words, had- received judicial interpretation, a.nd there could bo no controversy about them. He denied that the contents of the cask had boon pilfered, and submitted that tho cask had leaked, th erf ore defendants were free from any rsppnsibility in tho matter. ■ . After hearing tho evidence, the case was adjourned for legal argument.